Homeland Security

Homeland Security

Who would of thought to see the Russian ambassador sitting between two
of America’s intelligence anchors to discuss cooperation and
collaboration?

On May 28, just after Memorial Day, the Institute
for Education (IFE) hosted three esteemed members of Washington’s brain
trust at the Federal City Council to discuss how the U.S. national
security landscape has changed in the wake of the Boston Marathon
bombing in April. As part of IFE’s INFO Global Connections Series
Roundtable, His Excellency Sergey Kislyak, Russian ambassador to the
U.S.; Gen. Michael Hayden, former director of the CIA and National
Security Agency; and Ambassador John Negroponte, former director of
National Intelligence, shared their thoughts, in particular, on the
balance Americans have struck between security and freedom.

Glad I can clear that up for you Mr. President, David Axelrod and Chris Matthews.

President Obama's consistent reluctance to call violent acts of terrorism "terrorism" is becoming increasingly more disturbing, with him taking a full day to refer to the Boston bombing as an "act of terror."

Ten years after the invasion of Iraq, the only prominent loyalists
are the Weekly Standard’s William Kristol and his neocon posse.
Interestingly, all the prominent papers and media like The Washington Post and
"The Newshour with Jim Lehrer," which followed like a flock of pigeons,
have 10 years later demurred. They should clear the decks now and
retreat in infamy.

Peggy Noonan asks today in The Wall Street Journal if
the Republican Party can recover from Iraq. Partially. We start again
with the Pauls. The better question is can America recover. Yes, but a
new America – Rand Paul’s, Judge Andrew Napolitano’s and even Sarah
Palin’s has already emerged. And at CPAC 2013 this month it established
dominance.

While I often agree with Juan Williams and stand second to none in my opposition to abusive filibusters, I strongly disagree with his criticism of Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) in his column regarding Paul's talking filibuster last week.

I supported Paul's action and urged other progressives to support it so long as the purpose was not to deny John Brennan's confirmation as CIA director but to elevate important issues that should be unacceptable in our country: whether American citizens can be killed on American soil by the American government using drones, and the government justifying this practice with secret legal opinions.

Even two broken clocks agree with each other at some point. I believe
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) has performed a service with his talking
filibuster against current U.S. drone policy, so long as John Brennan is
promptly confirmed now that the point has been made. In my view, if the
U.S. can target a known terrorist in a nation such as Yemen, kill him.
However, when drones are used obsessively and more civilians are
inadvertently killed, this is bad. When the claim is made that drones
can be used on American soil against American citizens under secret
legal authorization that neither Congress nor the American people know
about, this is flat-out wrong.

China and Russia are gnawing at the bit to access our “secured” online universe, and Congress appears content to shut the power off on ourselves, leaving innovation in the dark. While there is no part of the left’s manifesto that encourages collaboration with America’s businesses, it needs to happen. Cooperation between the private and public sectors is essential to beat the opposition. Current measures in this Congress would instead force the U.S. to watch as foreign cyber-platoons advance in front of us.

Have we become complacent to the continuous threat posed by Islamic extremists? I fear that we have been so conditioned not to disparage the practices of other cultures that we continue to ignore this evil microbe among us. We have been so brainwashed about what's politically correct that we forget about what's morally correct. We forget that thousands of Muslim women are being enslaved by archaic religious practices. We forget that Muslim children are being taught to blame all the problems of their lives on Western culture. We even forget about the men who are being told to strap bombs onto their bodies and detonate themselves in public squares and unsuspecting places.

I’ve commented before (4/27/09, 5/8/09, 11/24/09 and 5/16/11) on the Bush post-9/11 policies about torture and the specious legal rationales for it.

Today, a report in Salon disclosed that a former State Department counselor to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Philip Zelikow, wrote an official memo critical of the proposed “enhanced interrogation techniques,” a charming phrase giving cover to what is really torture. According to the Zelikow report, the CIA’s use of “waterboarding, walling, dousing, stress positions and cramped confinement” was unprecedented in our prior wars and should be deemed unconstitutional (cruel and unusual punishment) and illegal. It “shocks the conscience,” a term the U.S. Supreme Court once coined to describe government behavior that should not be protected, no matter what the provocation.

This week from my hotel room in Lagos, Nigeria, for the first time in almost 10 years, I watched the towers fall. I listened to the tales of widows, friends and comrades as they recounted that day. I saw footage I’d never seen of firefighters running into the towers as others staggered out, and once again remembered the virtues of courage, sacrifice and what it truly means to be a hero. And I was overwhelmed with emotion. Just as hard a time as I had that day, maybe even more so because of what we’ve been through and where we are as a nation 10 years later.